Re: Resignation of Suresh Ramasubramanian and Udhay Shankar from the india-gii moderator role

Vickram, (et al)

Where we differ on this issue is on what makes for good discussion.

This incident crossed the line on two very different fronts. Again, from 
my perspective, taking a list discussion to a member's phone (without 
prior agreement) is an offense so egregious that it needs not to be 
delineated.

But more to the point, hurling accusations of corruption, based on 
nothing more than supposition, is a tactic which should never be 
tolerated in polite company such as I am pleased to keep on this list.

I would ask that we never lower ourselves to the standard where all 
comers are welcome regardless of the level of discussion they bring. 
Otherwise we risk becoming a dialog where the standard of entry becomes 
(with the necessary apologies to Groucho Marx) I refuse to join any list 
that would have me as a member.

Cheerfully,

Ken DiPietro
Cumberland MD

On 05/18/2015 08:45 AM, Vickram Crishna wrote:
>
> Ken, and everyone
>
> I am perfectly happy to share these duties once again with Suresh and 
> Udhay (in alphabetical order) if they so wish. Good eggs.
> However, I also wish that Sarbajit would exercise more than a little 
> moderation in his remarks, notwithstanding the truth that 
> evidence-based reports might indeed emerge into the public eye through 
> this interaction. I haven't seen it in this case. It should be the 
> basis for further discussion, if any, on that subject.
> Personal apologies to the list, well, the need is seen unanimously. 
> Either you want to be part of a community or you don't. And if the 
> purpose is to be a voice in the wilderness, please refrain from any 
> kinds of personal attacks. That voice is valuable, don't let it get 
> shrill. The choice is yours. This is, after all, a written medium, and 
> haste can shotgun where a fine needle would do.
> I feel disturbed that Nikhil left the group, and felt constrained to 
> mention you in his signing-off note. Now we all have to work to bring 
> him back on board.
> I also feel sorry that we were unable to resolve this to the 
> satisfaction of all four moderators before it spilled out. But here we 
> are, and here we remain, to quote Dune.
>
> On 18 May 2015 17:39, "ken" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> wrote:
>
>     To all,
>
>     It would deeply sadden me to see such a valuable resource as this
>     list devalued due to the actions of one member. No one should hold
>     that power over us all.
>
>     After reading through this thread, it appears that the underlying
>     issue is; were the list's fundamental rules broken and if so what
>     actions should be taken.
>
>     The fact that our moderation team is so divided would indicate
>     that a breech of the rules has occurred, even if the team has a
>     difference of opinion as to how the response should be framed.
>
>     Speaking as someone who has also tested the boundaries of this
>     list on more than one occasion, my philosophy has always been that
>     no one has a right to be free from offense. For any moderator to
>     attempt to keep a list to the point where no one is ever offended
>     is asking a human being to do the impossible. Conversely, at no
>     point should valuable, contributing members feel harassed to the
>     point where removing themselves from the list appears to be a
>     better option than staying.
>
>     During this last exchange, what was said on the list became
>     somewhat heated but still tolerable, in my evaluation. However,
>     taking this discussion to a personal level and calling a list
>     member at home crosses the limits of list decorum, even with the
>     question of a home office is raised.
>
>     Personally, anyone who would disrespect a person's privacy has
>     shown a lack of judgment indicating their inability to interact on
>     this list at the level of discourse required. When faced with a
>     very similar situation, I resigned from a list I once moderated as
>     well as left the organization I co-founded - so I not only
>     understand Suresh and Udhay's decision but side with them as well.
>     In my view, when the power of moderation is assigned to someone,
>     any decision made in the group's best interest needs to be
>     supported. And should an appeal on any such action be raised, it
>     should be moved through the moderation team as a whole and not
>     overturned without due process - otherwise a moderator has no
>     credibility.
>
>     None of the above suggests that I will be leaving this list nor
>     that I would join another list.
>
>     I humbly ask one of the best moderation teams I have ever had the
>     pleasure of dealing with to find a mutually acceptable solution to
>     this issue so that we can move forward. As a member of this list,
>     it is understood that I hold a responsibility to introduce content
>     for discussion as well as participate in those topics where I can
>     provide insight. As such, going forward, I pledge to put more
>     effort towards making this list a more active resource for us all.
>
>     Respectfully,
>
>     Ken DiPietro
>     Cumberland MD
>

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii